26 HARVARD LAW REVIEW credit" as importing something unexpressed which will accom- plish the clear intent of those who issue and those who re- ceive these instruments, or else important business interests must go unsecured and unprotected by law and business men must be driven to find ways of protecting [themselves outside of the law.^° If we are not yet prepared to treat letters of the fourth type squarely on business usage as pa^t of the law merchant, the burden of sustai n ing them must fall on that "much enduring word," estoppel. The New York cases show us a way out which has a real basis in the actual course of business. Normally in domestic commerce the purchaser, having contracted with the seller, goes to a bank, deposits money with it or makes arrangements for a loan whereby there is in effect a deposit of the money borrowed, and the bank issues the letter. Here, these facts being proved, the letter evidences that the bank has received and holds money to the use of the seller, upon the conditions named in the letter. In foreign commerce, the buyer contracts usually with the seller's agent abroad. He then goes to a foreign bank, deposits money or opens a credit — which by the continental law is the same thing — and the latter forwards the money to or sets up a credit with a New York bank, or forwards the money to or sets up a credit with such correspondent of the New York bank as the latter may designate. In either event, the New York bank, holding money or what it considers in substance the equivalent, issues the letter of credit, which the buyer-holder then turns ovfer to the seller-addressee, or more commonly sends direct to such addressee at buyer-holder's request. From the nature of the case, it would be an intolerable hardship upon the addressee to compel him to prove that these several steps actually took place in any given case. Therefore, when the letter is issued, may not the addressee reasonably assume that these steps have taken place and understand the letter as so representing to him? If this is a reasonable interpretation and he acts on it, the issuer is estopped to deny the facts so represented. Hence, whenever the words "confirmed letter of credit" or their '" Is this not shown by the way in which business, disgusted with the backward- ness of the law or more particularly of legal procedure, constantly resorts to extra- legal ways of adjusting controversies, as through Boards of Trade, Chambers of Commerce, Trade Associations, etc.?
